Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Aug 6.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Cell Biol. 2009 Jun 7;11(7):859–64. doi: 10.1038/ncb1894

Figure 3. Spatio-temporal analysis of cell shape and cell area change in the ectoderm of wild-type and Kruppel- embryos.

Figure 3

A) The central and posterior ectodermal cell populations (shaded areas) were analysed separately (see also Supp. Fig. 3I,J). (B-C) Strain rates in the AP axis for total (black), cell intercalation (blue) and cell shape (red), for the central and posterior populations of ectodermal cells in wild-type and Kruppel- embryos. Wild-type is shown as dotted lines and Kruppel as a ribbon, with ribbon shading indicating a significant difference between the two genotypes (p<0.05). (D, D’) Representation of the average cell shape, cell area (quantified by colour coded scale) and cell orientation, according to the cell’s position along the AP axis (cell positions are given in µm from cephalic furrow) and time. Note that ectodermal cells only are analysed in (D) wild-type and (D’) Kruppel- embryos. After 15 minutes of GBE, the wild-type germ-band cells acquire an isotropic shape and maintain it, whereas the cells elongate in the AP orientation in Kruppel- mutants, especially at the posterior, where cell area is also greatest at this time. E) Close-up of movie frame of wild-type and Kruppel- embryos at mid-extension in the posterior domain, showing that whereas wild-type cells retain an isotropic shape, mutant cells are visibly elongated in the AP axis.